Major Study Finds Masks Don’t Reduce COVID-19 Infection Rates <<MOD WARNING>>

1: only the misinformed would insist that there are no other studies on "the effectiveness of adding a mask". LOL at you writing that the only failure was the data! The whole study is based on that failed data. You are clearly trolling.
2: my posts are criticizing the OP link title and its conclusion which you continually avoid. I haven't questioned it criticized the study once. Why are you giving tacit support to anti-maskers?

 

In that sentence ''they'' was preceding ''the source'' referring to the Danish study which the Federalist was citing and misinterpreting.

 

Sigh.

This is where policy intersects science.

You have to make a decision, so you use what you have. In this case, that's the expertise of the experts.

(Not the internet ones that don't actually know anything)

 

One of the things you guys gave up on is reality.

That includes minor details like governing the country. Fauci did what he had to.

The interesting part is that Trump has lied constantly, and screwed up more often than that. And you never talk about his failures because your nonsense is there solely to protect him.

 

So you like to make decisions not based on science. I'm glad we've ckeared that up.

Can you say "science" again?

 

It is up to the pro mask thinkers to present the evudence adequate to reject the null hypothesis, masks do nothing

 

You often can't wait for perfect information.

But there was enough.

Fauci has been working in good faith trying to get the disease under control. Trump and his Cult are the opposite of that.

 

Not how the world works.

 

The debunking has occurred:

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ntation-of-the-so-called-danish-study.581585/

 

LOL the lead author of the study agrees with my conclusions!

 

For the science illiterate, I'll repeat, the null hypothesis (masks do nothing to decrease spread of disease) is in effect until strong scientific evidence is presented, sufficient to reject it.

 

For the science illiterate, I'll repeat, the null hypothesis (masks decrease spread of disease) is in effect until strong scientific evidence is presented, sufficient to reject it. Meanwhile countries which have strict mask wearing have significantly lower incidence of the virus.

 

Friend its out there, its been out there, you cant even read it all there's so much of it out there, and that link I gave you is the scientific evidence hitting back at the misinterpreted lies surrounding this 'Danish study' INCLUDING its actual authors basically saying these anti-maskers got it wrong. You've constructed a very nicely worded sentence but it's really just a smart sounding way of saying:

 

So you have no scientific support of your position. Thanks for clearing that up..

Say "science" again.

 

So you have no evidence to reject the null hypothesis, that is, masks do not allter the incidence of disease, which is in effect until you present evidence to reject it.

Anyone with an inkling of scientific understanding knows that the null hypothess does not require proof(masks do not alter the incidence of disease).
The null hypothesis requires proof in order to reject.

Babling about "science" when you have no understanding of its basic tenets is amusing, but useless

 

You believe you need to be protected from everyone you pass on the street?

The experts have been fluid. When we couldn't get masks 'we don't really need them, wash your hands'. When supply catches up 'masks must be mandated for the good of mankind, wear a mask save a grandma'. Nobody mentions gloves at all anymore. The people pulling political strings are having quite a time.

 

1). Only the misinformed would not know this is the only randomized controlled study on reduction of infections of SARS-CoV-2 in mask wearers. If it wasn’t you would produce another. Were you surprised you couldn’t find one to post? Did it upset you?

Data failing to support a hypothesis is not a problem. It’s how we learn. It’s the foundation of science. I understand you getting emotional because an actual controlled study didn’t produce the results you wanted. You didn’t want to learn from a study, you wanted a hammer to club those you see as mask deniers with. But we shouldn’t get emotional about science. It’s very dangerous to do so. Ask yourself if you and others would criticize this study if it was conducted in exactly the same manner but concluded masks reduce incidence of infections in wearers by 80%? Ask yourself why, if I knew about the design of the study others didn’t? And if they did, why were they only critical of the methods after results were “controversial” and not critical of them when the study was designed last spring and that design published for public consumption?

The study conclusions, results and discussion are all predicated on the data. That’s how this stuff works. Again, data failing to support the hypothesis is not a failure of the study. It only failed to confirm your biases so you see the whole thing as a “failure”. To those of us in pursuit of knowledge, not bias confirmation, failure of data to support a hypothesis is just as valuable (often more valuable) than data supporting a hypothesis. It’s sad I have to explain this to people who try and claim science as a basis for their worldviews.

2). Your posts made incorrect claims. As usual you presented misinformation to combat misinformation.

How is honestly discussing a study and encouraging everyone else to do the same giving tacit support to anti maskers? You want me to tell lies about this study to advance your agenda? I’ve had your political side call me stupid, out of touch, and a pseudoscience pusher for recommending mask usage based on other studies. All I’ve ever done is follow the best evidence we have. I’m saddened you aren’t interested in anything but bias confirmation.

 

All those involved in conducting this study are recommending the use of masks as far as I can tell. That’s irrelevant to what we learn from this study.

 

Nobody was using them the right way.

 

I suggest reading this and watching the imbedded video.
https://www.acponline.org/acp-newsr...ecommendation-to-other-public-health-measures

 

IMO it is apparent that this virus will spread regardless of policies instituted by our "health" experts or political leaders. IMO they all (Gavin Newsom) understand this but cannot admit that they are basically powerless and are afraid of being blamed for the spread if they don't "do something". This also leaves them an out when their policies don't work (Gov Cuomo - You all didn't follow the rules so it's your fault the virus is spreading and people are dying). The Great Barrington Doctrine is the way to deal with Covid-19>

 

The only thing masks contain are the large droplets from coughs, etc. Aerosol particles which comprise more than 80% of particles in exhaling go right through medical and cloth masks. If you are sick stay home. If you are singing in a choir keep your social distancing.

 

Say whut?? Were they putting them on their feet?

 

To date there is still no strong scientific evidence demonstrating reduced incidence of disease from mask usage. The null hypothesis, masks have no effect on incidence of disease with respiratory virus, has not been rejected.

Talk of droplets is meaningless. The only metric that matters is incidence of disease. Anything else is not "science" despite the armchair scientists thinking they're on to something.

 

FWIW, I've noted that shopping while wearing a mask, the mask does not filter out other peoples airborne farts.